Skip to main content
Normal View

Light Rail Projects

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 2 April 2019

Tuesday, 2 April 2019

Questions (5)

Eamon Ryan

Question:

5. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the process by which he can direct the National Transport Authority to consider and develop alternative alignments for the metro southside. [15443/19]

View answer

Oral answers (6 contributions)

I was listening to the Minister's discussion on metro south. I was very glad that last week the Taoiseach, in answering questions about the project, indicated that the Government would be willing to consider alternative route options, possibly including one to University College Dublin and Sandyford. I know representatives of the NTA, at a committee discussion of the matter last week, indicated it would require some sort of direction from the political system for it to activate that, as the authority is constrained by its regulatory system. It would have to wait for another review of the whole Dublin transport strategy, leading to a delay of two or three years, which we cannot afford. I am keen to find out how the Department and the Minister might be able to support that consideration of alternative alignments by assisting the NTA or giving direction that it may need to allow it in a timely manner.

I thank the Deputy for his question. The Deputy is aware of the current status of the MetroLink project both from my earlier answer and the briefing session the National Transport Authority arranged for Members last week. The Taoiseach was correct in that the project has a great deal of appeal and all projects should be considered if they appear sensible on the surface, although they must come under serious examination. There must be appropriate consideration in this regard.

I acknowledge the Deputy’s interest in improving public transport in the city and the country. Since publication of the emerging preferred route last year, the Deputy has been vocal in expressing his views and the views of some of his constituents about those initial proposals that had been put forward by the NTA. The views of everyone who made a submission to last year’s consultation process, all 8,000 of them, were carefully considered by the NTA and Transport Infrastructure Ireland and they informed the development of what is now known as the preferred route. Members of the public and in this House now have another opportunity to make their views known on this route and I encourage them to do so.

I have heard various metro routes proposed by people in recent months and I have no doubt more will be proposed in the coming weeks. However, proposals are sometimes put forward for areas where the population and transport demand levels now and in the future simply do not need metro levels of service: many areas, including those mentioned by the Deputy many times, can be very adequately served by other high quality public transport options that can be delivered at lower levels of cost and disruption.

It is well recognised internationally that transport planning, particularly of this city-region scale, cannot be undertaken on the basis of an individual Deputy's preferences or disparate ideas. It has to be rationally and logically planned with careful evaluation of the actual transport needs and the capacity required to meet those needs. The Deputy would appreciate this, having being involved with decisions of this sort. I know he supports such a process: he made similar comments in the House last week. It is why a previous Government with which he is not unfamiliar introduced the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008, which established what we now know as the NTA. It is why that Act requires the NTA to develop a 20-year transport strategy, covering all modes and the entire greater Dublin area. It is why that Act stipulates stringent requirements upon the NTA to consult the public, the Oireachtas and local authorities in developing that strategy. It is why that Act requires the draft strategy be submitted to the Minister to allow the Minister make his or her views known and, if necessary, amended before it is approved. The Deputy knows that the establishment of this statutory framework was long sought and long fought.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

I really fear we are trying to undo the hard-won progress that we have made in terms of strategic transport planning. I welcome the Deputy’s desire for better public transport and I share it. I do not, however, believe we serve the interests of anybody in attempting to upend a carefully constructed strategic framework designed to look well into the future and plan our transport infrastructure needs. The Deputy’s ideas on different possibilities may well be worth consideration and that consideration will be given, but it must be given within the framework that exists.

When the NTA starts reviewing the transport strategy for the greater Dublin area, as it is obliged to do every six years, in accordance with the Act, all options are on the table. That review must be completed by 2021, so work will start during 2020 on it. Last week the Deputy in this House reiterated his desire not to hold up MetroLink and I share that desire. I also have no desire to interfere in the improvements that have been introduced, and which the Deputy supports, to how we strategically plan for our transport future.

What the Taoiseach referred to is a variation in the possible route for the metro on the south side. It is a variation in this sense. There is a real case to be made for Terenure-Rathfarnham but we can put that to one side because the Taoiseach has done so and concentrate on the UCD-Sandyford option because that has various characteristics. First, there is very high demand for transport. Second, it is a variation in the sense that it would address the long-term objective, which is already set out in the transport strategy, of upgrading the capacity capability of the green line. The Minister will know this more than anyone else because it is his constituents who will be discommoded if that was to be put back 20 years in respect of what the alternative possible approach would be now. I know the NTA is concerned and feels that under its legislative measures, it could not look at any variation because its statute requires it to do a full transport strategy and so on. That is why I asked the question. In respect of the Government coming to the view that there is something to be gained by not waiting 20 years to address that capacity issue on the green line and looking at the other routing because it also brings major transport benefits, from day one, it would see very high patronage and does not have any of the disadvantages referred to about low patronage areas. It could continue from where it is currently planned to stop with the far exit at Ranelagh on to Sandyford. There are about four stations and 6 km of routing that is ultimately doable. If the Government wanted to proceed with that, how would it suggest it?

All the routes suggested by the Deputy are worthy of debate. Any suggestions he makes are very worthy of debate in this House and they will go into the mix when the review commences. When it concludes, it can review the general transport strategy in a way the Deputy approved of thoroughly in the past. That is the system and process it will go through. In the meantime, the Deputy's favourite project, the south western Luas, has been looked at and a judgment has been made for the moment at least that this is not worthy and does not merit prioritisation in terms of the Luas at the moment because the population is not adequate to merit it being built and the expense. That does not mean that the Deputy should not suggest others and that they should not also be considered in the context of the review, which the Deputy knows is coming up. I would welcome him doing so because this will be soon and no doubt, the Deputy will be in power in 2021 when this comes into being.

I look forward to that day. The Taoiseach has ruled out that route alignment and has said explicitly that he sees sense in the UCD-Sandyford route, which I also see sense in. What I am saying is that rather than just leaving this process to continue, intervention from the Government is required if it believes that provides real benefits. It needs to consider what it must to do to assist the NTA to be able to look at that option so that rather than it being a two-phase process, when that tunnelling machine comes through and finally comes to rest in Ranelagh, as is currently proposed, it does not stop there but continues straight on towards Donnybrook, UCD, Stillorgan and Sandyford. In that way, it would bring a number of transport benefits, including the fact that we would be able to cope with the long-term growth on the green line. Does the Government have no responsibility to help progress that? I believe it does. It needs to work with the NTA or indeed other parties here if it believes it has sense and give the NTA the direction to do the modelling and assessment of that route option so it can be done in a timely manner.

Sometimes I find that what the Deputy has to say can be quite confusing. I assume he has now dropped that south western project he had in mind. I notice that he has abandoned it. That is all right then. I see nothing wrong with him dropping one project one week and taking up another project another week. It is somewhat volatile but he is entitled to be volatile in this business and to drop one project he has championed for a long time, to say it is no good and to accept the opinions expressed to us that his project was never a runner in the first place. That is fair enough so let us have more ideas from him. It would be very useful if he produced a large number of ideas on the transport strategy because we will have a review of that strategy. It is coming up in the next 18 months and will conclude in 2021. The Deputy will be able to have an input into that within the constraints to which he objected but which he was so prominent in setting up in 2008.

Top
Share